Background
Jennifer Bonney, a Darlot native title common law holder, sought judicial review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) of the Registrar’s March 2022 decision to register Watarra Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC. Watarra was appointed as the prescribed body corporate to hold the Darlot native title.
Bonney attended the December 2021 pre-incorporation meeting but was not listed on the attendance register or in the application as a proposed member. She said the meeting record used in the registration application had been altered or was misleading, and sought recognition for herself and others as “founding members.” She became a Watarra member about eight months after its incorporation.
The Court’s Holding
Jackson J rejected the Registrar’s standing objection. Although “founding member” is not a statutory status, registration directly caused listed consenting persons to become members while unlisted persons did not. As an eligible native title holder whose membership rights were temporarily deferred, Bonney was a person aggrieved for ADJR Act purposes.
The Court nevertheless dismissed the application. The shorter pre-incorporation record was not misleading: it was an extract prepared to establish the resolutions relevant to incorporation, while the longer document was draft meeting minutes. Bonney did not prove fraud, alteration, procedural unfairness, legal error, failure to consider a mandatory matter, no evidence, or unreasonableness. The CATSI Act did not require the Registrar to verify that the proposed-members list was complete or accurate. In any event, the requested relief had no utility because Bonney later became a member and identified no material prejudice from the delay.
Key Takeaways
- An eligible native title holder omitted from initial membership may have ADJR Act standing where registration temporarily deprives them of membership rights.
- The CATSI Act registration regime does not require the Registrar to determine whether every potential member was included in a proposed-members list.
- A judicial-review remedy will be refused where it would not produce practical utility.
Why It Matters
The decision distinguishes standing from merits in challenges to registration decisions affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander corporations. A person may have sufficient interest to bring a claim without proving that the Registrar acted unlawfully.
It also confirms the limited scope of review of incorporation materials: disagreement about membership lists or meeting records will not establish reviewable error without evidence of a statutory breach, fraud, or another recognised ground of review.